Chip with simple program for Toy

[KILOWATT]

Hi...everyones thanks for you replies. Yes i'm aware of the danger of
ozone. I won't do high volumes shock treatments in a place where there's
some people/pets/plants of course! This said, i was happy to read your reply
Don. What you described really seems to be what i've bought... thanks for
your time.
http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=3878124827&ssPageName
=STRK:MEWN:IT




"Don Klipstein" <don@manx.misty.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd51jme.47p.don@manx.misty.com...

In article <Ew34e.3293$Fy3.280205@news20.bellglobal.com>, KILOWATT wrote:
Hi everyones...thanks for your time. I wish to make a large ozone
generator
and i'm wondering if one of those two methods (see subject line) produces
less byproduct (like nitrous oxyde) than the other ? Maybe i'm wrong and
pure oxygen MUST be used to not have any byproducts...not shure. Any
comments? TIA for any replies.

I surely think that 184.9 nm UV produces more ozone and less NOx than
coronas, sparks/arcs, etc...

Do not confuse 184.9 nm, the shorter and secondary of the two main
shortwave UV wavelengths of a low pressure mercury discharge, with 253.7
nm which is the main one but basically useless for intentional ozone
generation. The main application of 253.7 nm is germicidal use.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

 

And no trolls. Right?
GG

 

[jason]

Sure Garth(or Jon). I will do my best as a learner and help people who
is in need
Thank you so much


Jason

 

Hey,this is crap.....bible describes characters and themes as a
phycological description or plot or plan and generally somone eles,yeah
whoever wrote the thing.
In phycotic nature we all think the same no matter what,hence why some
beleive it has a meaning and why many cannot describe it's purpose from
a scientific point of veiw.

Anyone that walks round in a white suit with a white silly hat and
describes itself as "POPE" has lost the plot totally.
Think about it.
Same as why some elect a president or primeminister.....why?because
they do so much good and have so much love and want to save the world
so you can live in peace forever?
These type walk around in silly cloths too...
Think about it.!
Take your bible as you understand it and force it out of your mind and
place it all round the place as it suits...
You will see that the bible just describes what a fuckedup bunch of
phycological nuts all the people in the world are.
Phycotic is the answer to all your dreams,all reality, and all being in
short words

Yeah yeah...I got better things to do that try to spell.
continue with my plans for world domination ofcourse

 

[Andrew Holme]

UHFPD wrote:

UHFPD <UHFPD@stardistramp.invalid> wrote:

Andrew Holme <andrew@nospam.com> wrote:


"The" RF cable - singular - i.e. is everything modulated onto one
coax?
Just checking.

YES


Upon further investigation, even altering rf o/p channel does
not
remove diagonal patterning from feed down UHF cable to
downstairs.

This is really obvious when the cctv rf feed is fed downstairs,
into
the aerial DA, without the aerial feed into the DA, seems to be
reduced somewhat by combining at the aerial DA i/p, with the
UHF
normal earial

This paragraph is unclear. A diagram might help.


Both CCTV RF and Aerial connected gives less patterning than CCTV
RF on
it's own




Is the DA meant to handle UHF modulator level signals? Does it
have
multiple inputs? You're not using an aerial splitter / combiner
into its
antenna input are you?

Yes and yes


PS combining both signals now I have moved the daisy chained VHS's
downstairs, feeding them from the 2.4ghz link, with the house aerial
does NOT give any interference problems !!

Must be something to do with the loop between downstairs and upstairs
earths from mains / possible inductance into CCTV RF Cable from
upstairs
to downstairs, though I doubt this as the interference signal is so
strong on it's own.

Possibly something to do with CCTV HD recorder video o/p, VHS video
i/p's, and RF cable earth ??


By "2 VHS in series" I take it you mean daisy-chained via UHF
in/out. So
you weren't using a DA then? Hmmm.... Can you post a link to
spec / info
on this DA.

Yes

What is the angle of the diagonal pattern? 45 degs

How many fringes do you get
across a TV line?

approx 30

What channels were the UHF modulators operating on at the
time? Does altering the UHF channels change the pattern?

No

Have you tested the cable run (inner and outer) for continuity/shorts?

 

[Thomas Vogel]

Hi,

no, it´s not for a bomb! I just need it for my music station to woke up in
the morning. My new music station has no timer and I can´t switch it with a
timer. So I want to construct a circuit, which switch by an alarm clock over
a relay a remote control. Pleas email me the schematic+parts list.

Thomas

 

[Thomas Vogel]

John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message news:<agta611dbh5utnvos47ggtfdve6ufglr48@4ax.com>...

On 19 Apr 2005 11:03:51 -0700, Tommi-Vogel@gmx.de (Thomas Vogel)
wrote:

Hi,

no, it´s not for a bomb! I just need it for my music station to woke up in
the morning. My new music station has no timer and I can´t switch it with a
timer. So I want to construct a circuit, which switch by an alarm clock over
a relay a remote control. Pleas email me the schematic+parts list.

---
Here ya go:


+---+---------------+------+------+---+---+-------+
| | | | | | | |
| [10k] [1M] [100K] [10K] | |K | O------>C
| | | | | |[1N4148] [COIL]- -|
| | +-|+\ | | | | | O--> |
| | | | >-+------|-|+\ | | |
[BAT] +-[0.1ľF]-+-----|-|-/ | | | >--+-------+ +----------->NO
| | | | | +-|-/
| | | | |+ | |
| [MIC] [100k] [10K] [10ľF] [1M] |
| | | | | | |
+---+---------+-----+------+------+---+


The microphone is a Panasonic WM-61A, the comparators are part of an
LMV393, the battery is 3X 1.5VAA, and the relay is a COTO 9007-05-40.

Here's how it works:

After you finish building and testing it, put it in a soundproof box
with your alarm clock and connect the relay contacs (C and NO, above)
to the remote control. Voila!, when the alarm clock goes off you
won't hear it, bit it'll turn on your music station. (Radio???)

Or, you could forget the whole thing and just let the alarm clock wake
you up.

hi,

thank you for this schematic, but please send it at my e-mail adress
in a better format as a picture, that I can better realize it.


Thomas

 

[PeteS]

In addition to what Larry said (and I completely agree with all the
comments), other considerations are :

Was the layout of the signals set for impedance controlled tracks?
(this implies a ground plane somewhere, and if you get the impedance
right - which can be forced with the correct terminations - helps
enormusly with EMI issues)

If you know the source of the emissions is the core device, can you use
a spread spectrum oscillator to run it? That helps with EMI issues (by
spreading the energy across a wider band, thus reducing the emissions
at any one frequncy, at least for long period type issues).

What is the clock running at? If it's high, you may be able to slow it
down and that may very well help too.

Cheers

PeteS

 

[Thomas Vogel]

Terry Pinnell <terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote in message news:<40ch61tp51dfr3g9sop3mrvj4fmjrqps7s@4ax.com>...

Tommi-Vogel@gmx.de (Thomas Vogel) wrote (to John Fields):


thank you for this schematic, but please send it at my e-mail adress
in a better format as a picture, that I can better realize it.


Thomas

Did you not try the approach I suggested over two weeks ago to your
original post?
Subject: Re: a circuit to switch a relay by a alarm clock
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 12:23:13 +0100
Message-ID: <6bh751pmrss0soi22e3ji1e6tt9qmgon6p@4ax.com
Click this: news:6bh751pmrss0soi22e3ji1e6tt9qmgon6p@4ax.com

Of course I have tried it, but I don´t have find a schematic to this.
What´s with the "one shot 555"? Do you think I can built it with this
circuit?

 

[zoro robbin hood]

yo

 

[Thomas Vogel]

John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message news:<2bjf61l7clur0educ44sj4q5ngpiqjlubp@4ax.com>...

On 21 Apr 2005 07:06:35 -0700, Tommi-Vogel@gmx.de (Thomas Vogel)
wrote:

John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message news:<agta611dbh5utnvos47ggtfdve6ufglr48@4ax.com>...
On 19 Apr 2005 11:03:51 -0700, Tommi-Vogel@gmx.de (Thomas Vogel)
wrote:

Hi,

no, it´s not for a bomb! I just need it for my music station to woke up in
the morning. My new music station has no timer and I can´t switch it with a
timer. So I want to construct a circuit, which switch by an alarm clock over
a relay a remote control. Pleas email me the schematic+parts list.

---
Here ya go:


+---+---------------+------+------+---+---+-------+
| | | | | | | |
| [10k] [1M] [100K] [10K] | |K | O------>C
| | | | | |[1N4148] [COIL]- -|
| | +-|+\ | | | | | O--> |
| | | | >-+------|-|+\ | | |
[BAT] +-[0.1ľF]-+-----|-|-/ | | | >--+-------+ +----------->NO
| | | | | +-|-/
| | | | |+ | |
| [MIC] [100k] [10K] [10ľF] [1M] |
| | | | | | |
+---+---------+-----+------+------+---+


The microphone is a Panasonic WM-61A, the comparators are part of an
LMV393, the battery is 3X 1.5VAA, and the relay is a COTO 9007-05-40.

Here's how it works:

After you finish building and testing it, put it in a soundproof box
with your alarm clock and connect the relay contacs (C and NO, above)
to the remote control. Voila!, when the alarm clock goes off you
won't hear it, bit it'll turn on your music station. (Radio???)

Or, you could forget the whole thing and just let the alarm clock wake
you up.




hi,

thank you for this schematic, but please send it at my e-mail adress
in a better format as a picture, that I can better realize it.

No. I prefer to keep discussions like this here, so that everyone can
participate in arriving at a solution for you, if they choose.

Writing schematics in ASCII is a way to use very little bandwidth to
convey a lot of information, and also to make sure that when the
article is archived the information stays with it essentially forever.
If you want to play, you need to learn how to use the toys. If the
schematic is garbled, view it using a non-proportional font like
Courier, and if you don't understand the operation of the circuit
post your questions here and one or some of us will be happy to help
you.

You´re right, but for me it had been a big puzzle work, to know how I
must construct the elements, if I don`t have seen the schematic with
the elements in the right order, here while I have answear you.

What are comparators? I don´t have find it in my dictornary. Can you
explain it?

And what is (COIL) and (1N4148)? Is the last one a diode?



And who are these conected? * *

| | +-|+\ | | | | | O--> |
| | | | >-+------|-|+\ | | |
[BAT] +-[0.1ľF]-+-----|-|-/ | | | >--+-------+ +----------->NO
| | | | | +-|-/

Means this:

\

--+
/

that two ways are conected to one?



And what did this mean:

--|-|+\
| | >
+-|-/

What means these [ | ] in the middel?


And what is with the K over the(1N4148)? and to what go the arrows at
the right side? And what mean there the [ | ] ?

Thomas

 

[Thomas Vogel]

John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message news:<ukal615f5ttrv5tjj1h13esrt2dn2ao37u@4ax.com>...

On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 10:51:19 -0700, Peter Bennett
peterbb@somewhere.invalid> wrote:

On 23 Apr 2005 04:41:48 -0700, Tommi-Vogel@gmx.de (Thomas Vogel)
wrote:


You´re right, but for me it had been a big puzzle work, to know how I
must construct the elements, if I don`t have seen the schematic with
the elements in the right order, here while I have answear you.

What are comparators? I don´t have find it in my dictornary. Can you
explain it?

A comparator is an integrated circuit which has two inputs (called +
and -), and one output. When the + input is more positive than the -
input, the output will be high. If the - input is more positive, the
output will be low.

And what is (COIL) and (1N4148)? Is the last one a diode?

(COIL) is the coil of the relay, and (1N4148) is a diode. The "K"
indicates the cathode end of the diode.



And who are these conected? * *

| | +-|+\ | | | | | O--> |
| | | | >-+------|-|+\ | | |
[BAT] +-[0.1ľF]-+-----|-|-/ | | | >--+-------+ +----------->NO
| | | | | +-|-/


And what did this mean:

--|+\
| >---
--|-/

That is a comparator

You will have to go to the National Semiconductor website (or google
for "LMV393 datasheet") to get the datasheet for the comparator that
John suggested - The LMV393 is a dual comparator - there are two
separate comparators in the package. I would suggest using an LM393
instead, as the LMV393 is in a tiny surface mount package which will
be hard to handle.

---
I chose the LMV393 because (at 5V) its supply current is 200ľA max,
yet it can sink 20mA, so it beats the LM393 on both counts. But
you're right, it is surface mount, which the OP might not be able to
deal with. So, he gets to trade one off against the other or, maybe,
some kind soul will find him a DIP alternative.

I have found four different comparators of LM393:

LM393 N (0,4ľA)
LM393 Mot (0,25ľA)
LM393 P TIS (0,04ľA)
LM Mx NSC (0,4ľA)

Which of these should I take?

What are the conditions of the relay? I don´t find a COTO... . Please
tell me the voltage and the resistence of it or a other model.

 

born again spammer

 

[Anthony Fremont]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:qv3r61pi5lrm9h07ai7bvovk2drcnqva90@4ax.com...

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 20:11:58 GMT, "Anthony Fremont"
spam@anywhere.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:fe8q61pdi7787n4c5c2sqvsqhj77nb9vrf@4ax.com...
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 00:43:35 GMT, "Anthony Fremont"
spam@anywhere.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message

snipped a bunch more side-stepping and invective/ad-hominem crap

---
Translation: "The sonofabitch nailed me, so I'll just shout one
more
insult and pretend he didn't. And now for something completely
different..."

However you wish to see it John, though I didn't use any cuss words.

---
'Crap" is a cuss word, and besides, "The thought is the same as the
deed."
---

Crap is just a tad less ugly than FU, don't you think?

---
HC4066, about 50 cents, cap about a dime, resistors about a
nickle,
diodes about a nickle so, for a one off, that's about $0.70.

Didn't you have a pot in your design?

---
Yeah, but it was a nicety. For the cost-conscious, and if the
period
isn't all that critical, 510k +/- 5% will be just fine.

I'd go with jumpers on a micro. They're cheap and highly
configurable.

---
Not as configurable as a delta R, and good luch with those jumpers on
an 8 pin chip.

8 pins makes it trickier with just 6 for i/o, but not impossible. 1 pin
to drive the relay leaves 5 jumpers and that still gives me an easy 32
steps to be used however I wish.

PCB, transistor, relay is a wash for either system.

Probably wouldn't need a transistor to drive the relay as long as
5V@25mA will do it. Why not a nice SSR instead?

---
Oh, I don't know... Maybe because that's not what the OP of the
thread
in sed you referenced asked for?

An SSR doesn't qualify as a relay?

---
Not as a relay with mechanical contacts, but it doesn't matter. The OP
asked for something which could _drive_ a relay, which is what I gave
him. I showed a mechanical relay because that's what he said he was
going to use, but if he wanted to switch to an SSR, that would be up
to him.
---


A one off for a micro is gonna cost you the micro, a programmer,
a
learning curve and programming and debugging time.

How come the full cost of a programmer and the micro's entire
learning
curve gets factored in every time a micro is mentioned as a
solution?

---
Because if you haven't bought/built one and you haven't been
through
the process, then you'll have to buy/build one and go through the
process if you want to play.
---

The same goes for test equipment, soldering stuff etc.... It's just
one
more tool that you need, nothing more. A good PIC programmer is less
than $100. Compared to the $150 I spent on my audio frequency
generator
that I almost never use, it's a great investment.

It's a one time cost, just like the rest of anyones test equipment
or
education.

---
Yes, of course, but it's a one-time cost and an ongoing effort
which
will will be unwarranted if the goal at hand is to build a one-off
widget with a total cost of, say, $10 or less.

But it would be worth buying a DMM, a soldering iron, solder, etching
stuff etc.....?

---
You'd need that stuff whichever way you decided to go, but you'd only
need the other stuff if you were going to implement the device using a
micro, so it would be stupid to go that way when the other way is so
simple.

For a one off, one-time project either way would be stupid from a cost
vs. return viewpoint.

I spent less than $75.00 on my programming hardware and the
dev tools were free from Microchip. My scope cost me more than
$400
fifteen years ago and it was used then. Nobody worries about the
thousands of dollars needed for the rest of the stuff you need to
effectively tinker in electronics, just the $50 for the programmer
like
it's some kind of major show-stopper.

---
The keyword there is 'tinker'. If that's _your_ bent, then fine.
Spend away. Understand however, that that's not _everyone's_ cup
of
tea and that some folks only want a simple, inexpensive, easily
realizable solution for a problem peculiar to them. Asking them to

Well, I guess that I see PIC chips like you see 74xx's

---
I doubt it. I work in both camps as well as in analog, and so far
you've demonstrated no skill with anything other than some alluded-to
ability to substitute programming for hardware you admittedly don't
understand and don't want to "take a lifetime to learn", or something
like that.

That's a real twisted interpretation of what I said there John. You
might be surprised by what I've been able to glom together over here.
I've even used a few transistors, op-amps and other icky analog stuff.
I'd like to see you search a Dallas 1-wire bus using a bunch of 74xx's.

The projects that I've built are a wee bit more complicated than the
project at hand. They would have been quite difficult to do without a
micro. I'm not saying that they couldn't be done, but they'd have been
real tough even by your standards I think.

I don't make a habit of bragging, but you make me feel obliged to put
forth some kind of evidence of ability. Therefore here are some of my
completed/working projects that I did:

I did an ultrasonic range finder w/lcd display. No biggy, but I used an
op-amp and comparator. A pendulum clock beat analyzer w/lcd of course
w/more analog stuff. Gives ratio of tick/tock beats/min etc.. An IR
controlled temp sensor display that reported readings from various
sensors strewn accros a 1-wire bus onto a graphical LCD screen. This
uses cool looking OCR numbers created from picking apart MS Paint bitmap
files (one of my cooler hacks, I think). All I had for the display was
a datasheet.

I also did a phone line powered Caller-ID display with a software modem
(that was probably the busiest PIC program I ever wrote with multiple
ISR handlers). That worked ok, but it was never quite perfect (in the
pure sense of the word). Since I don't have a DSO or logic analyzer I
could figure out what the problem was. I chalked it up to eronious zero
cross detects from 60HZ common mode noise on the phone line. Working
with phone line powered stuff is a real pain since you can't ground
anything. It was >99.9% correct, but that ain't good enough when one
bit error wrenches it up in a major way.

My recent ultra low-power project is a temperature data logger that
takes samples every 30 seconds and writes them to a 24C512. There is a
DS1307 RTC and an LM34. The sleep current is <5uA and the average
current is <200uA. I didn't think that was too shabby given the I2C
parts, the LM34, the RTC, the Vref for the ADC and the fact that it woke
up every second to see if it was time yet. You may think otherwise. It
also has a serial interface to pull the info out of the eeproms and to
set the clock/sample rate etc...

I have done many other projects as well, though many of them were never
committed to a permanent circuit board. Since the software is the key
part, they can be easily reproduced if needed. Most were built just to
see if I could "make it work", or to try communicating with some new
protocol (I2C, 1-Wire, SPI etc...) or to utilize some internal feature
of a PIC (CCP, ADC, UART, PWM, etc)

On a side note, I also did build my own 8052 BASIC computer using an
ATMEL 89c52, a surplus latch and 32K SRAM chip. Of course I flashed the
chip myself using the freely available image. I used a 373 as I didn't
know about the 573 latch. Lots of jumpers but it fits on a smallish
radio shack experimenter type circuit board. :-( Pretty neat when the
welcome message first came out. ;-)

Feel free to demand any sort of proof you need to back up these claims.
I have plenty of source code to show you and I could probably even take
a few pictures if necessary.

spend _anything_ on hardware which is going to gather dust after
the
project is finished is, at best, stupid. As is asking them to
spend
time learning how to use it, and to acquire the software skills
necessary to bring the "project" to completion.

Burning yet another straw man, you really are a fire bug. I don't
recall asking anyone to spend money on equipement to be used once.

---
It's not a straw man at all.
When you insist that using a ľC is a better solution than using
"discrete" logic, then if that insistance bears fruit, the requirement
for the equipment necessary to implement your solution will become
de rigueur. If the breadth of the project is the yield of a single
unit with a cost basically down in the noise compared to the required
expenditure in time and money to complete the project, then doesn't it
seem stupid to you to do it that way when doing it in hardware would
be so much faster and less expensive?

As I already said about this, yes it would be stupid to learn an
unecessary procedure for a one-off project. But then it would be stupid
to undertake the project under those conditions anyway (single unit,
super low cost). You can hardly justify the expense for any toolset
under those conditions. You seem to view the micro learning as a per
job expense, and I see it as a per life expense. As weve covered
before, the only dollar cost in PIC development is in the programmer
(and maybe the software that runs it). The rest of the devtools kit is
free. So all I see is a $75 expense and some hours to learn about
it(which a hobbiest, that's all it's about). Perhaps I am prejudiced
since I have 25 years of "professional software design" experience. ;-)

As I "self agrandised" before, if I was adamently suggesting a PIC
to
someone, I'd be offering some help to go with it. You can make of
that
what you wish.

---
From what you've offered so far, I would suggest that anyone who
decides to go that route find help elsewhere.

You haven't seen any of my work, so what qualifies you to judge it? But
that's what prejudice is all about, isn't it?

IME, debugging time for this
project would be virtually non-existent and the end result would
be
more
useful since it would have a much greater dynamic range on the
time
constant.

---
If you think the OP was wrong in asking for what he wanted, then
why
don't you get your ass over to sed and tell him about it instead of
sitting here playing self - aggrandising games and kvetching about
every goddam thing under the sun?

Er um, because I don't want to. You really ought to stop trying to
control things around here. Ordering people around on usenet is not
likely to win you many friends.

---
Er um, because you're a chickenshit and you know that if you do you're
going to wind up getting your ass handed to you. Again.

How so, if I code it up and flash the chips for him? Who's going to
"hand me my ass" then?

You really ought to follow your own advice, hypocrite. You telling me
to stop trying to control things around here is you trying to control
me. Friends I've got. Insignificant gadflies like you I don't need.

Only making an observation, carry on as you see fit. Or is that me
telling you what to do again?

Hint: He doesn't _want_ to be able to change the timing, he just
wants something that'll give him a contact closure, repeatedly,
every
hour or so.
---

You figure it out.

Your cost may be a little less assuming a PIC 12Fxxx (~1.20 single
qty),
but a 4 bit micro would change that.

---
YAFI, LOL! Suggest away, and don't forget to include the cost of
the
programmer and the dev tools, and the time required to learn how to
use them and to learn the instruction set.

Programmers and dev tools don't count. We've already covered this.
They are in the same category as all other dev tools and electronics
equipment you own.

---
Other than your just being obstinate, I fail to see why, (without
even going into the learning curve part of it) you think that paying
money for dev tools which will only be used once is better than not
having to pay for the dev tools, yet winding up with exactly what you
want anyway.

That was never my argument. That's the argument you keep making back
because that's all you think you hear from me. I wouldn't suggest
someone buy dev tools for a one time simple project like this. In fact
I wouldn't suggest that they buy much of anything as the cash outlay for
minimal equipment is still ridiculous for a project like this. I would
suggest they find someone that can do it for them and pay them.

Outside of the minor cost
difference, I still feel that the micro offers far more potential
for
a
better end result.

---
"Minor cost difference"? You're either trying to sneak some shit
in
there or you can't do, or haven't done, the arithmetic, so I'll do
it
for you: Since the transistor, the base resistor, the clamp diode,
the relay and the PCB are a wash, what's left is $1.20 for your
suggested PIC way VS about $0.63 for my way.

That comes to:


$1.20
-$0.63
------
$0.57

which is about 1/2 as expensive as your way. "Minor cost
difference"?
I think not.

It's certainly not half as expensive when you factor in a board and
the
rest of the common parts. The difference quickly shrinks to ~10% or
less, now doesn't it?

---
That's a good point but, bottom line, you still save about 50 cents if
you don't do it with a micro and you don't have to learn how to do it
and buy all the stuff to do it with if you're not going to do it
again.

How many people learn to program a PIC for one simple project and then
never use them again? That's got to be a fairly small number.

---

Hmmm... Where did I read this:

"BTW, I feel that a microcontroller would be a simpler, cheaper,
more
reliable (iow better) solution to the problem of resetting the
network
appliances on a regular basis. What do you think?"

1. Cheaper? I've just proven that it's not cheaper in onesies, and
I
doubt that with that huge cost differential it could be made
cheaper
in volume.

Admittedly for one off, it's pretty hard to be cheaper using an 8-bit
micro. A 4-bit proc would do the job, and it would be cheaper. BTW,
your quoted prices were a bit low as shown on Digikey, so things
aren't
as bad as you wish to make it seem. Of course your price was 70
cents
yesterday and now it's only 63 cents, so why am I not surprised?

---
Because you're stupid?

Not too stupid to see that you put forth numbers massaged to further
your personal agenda.

---

According to Digikey, the fairchild 4060 is 77 cents in single qty,
the
ST part is 55 cents each.

You just called me stupid, yet you don't even bother to comment on this.

2. Simpler? Since the ľC way would require a large investment in
time
in order to climb the learning curve, that can hardly be considered
a
simpler solution for a one-off.

What about the electronics learing curve? It's only about 1000 times
larger, be for real. That's the same old tired mantra formerly sung
by
"professional tube circuit designers" when whining about having to
learn
yucky old transistor theory.

---
Dumbass, the OP over on SED wasn't interested in spending a great deal
of time and some bucks on learning how to design a ľC timer; what he
wanted was something quick and easy which he could solder up, probably
on a piece of perfboard, which would do what he wanted. That's what
he got, and I got private email from him thanking me for the circuit
and letting me know that he'd let me know how it worked out. Rest
assured that I'll post the good news when I hear it.

Yes, we will all be duly impressed that you successfully designed a
ripple counter to reset a router once an hour. Perhaps you can get
another patent.

Now, do you have any comments on whether it'll work or not? Why don't
you build one and find out? It'll only cost you five bucks or so and
we'll learn whether you know how to solder or not. Or wire-wrap. Or
whether you're just plain ol' fulla shit.

The soldering part was cute, but I'm not just out of school. I've
actually been soldering for a "little while" now. Never was really
interested in wire wrapping, to messy. I do allot of solderless
breadboard stuff though. They're great for knocking out PIC projects.

 

[Thomas Vogel]

I have found four different comparators of LM393:

LM393 N (0,4ľA)
LM393 Mot (0,25ľA)
LM393 P TIS (0,04ľA)
LM Mx NSC (0,4ľA)

Which of these should I take?

What are the conditions of the relay? I don´t find a COTO... . Please
tell me the voltage and the resistence of it or a other model.

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 19:05:10 GMT, "Anthony Fremont"
<spam@anywhere.com> wrote:

LMAO I'm not the one
touting myself as a "professional circuit designer".

---
Perhaps that's because you aren't.

Well duh, that would be the appropriate thing to do wouldn't it?

---
Precisely. My .sig reads 'Professional Circuit Designer' because
that's what I am. Your .sig, OTOH, reads... nothing???
---

Did I say that somewhere? Since you mentioned it, don't you find the
word professional to be tiny bit redundant?

---
Not at all. 'Circuit Designer" means one thing, Professional Circuit
Designer' means quite another. Perhaps you're miffed because you'd
feel ridiculous using 'Professional Hobbyist' as a .sig?
---

Why do you feel a need to tell the world that you really do get paid?

---
Actually, it's more of an ad than anything else, and has brought in
some work from time to time, so it's important in that sense.
---

Do you think that I have no other skills, or is circuit design all
that
is important?

---
What skills you may have, other than in electronics, are of very
little interest to me since, in these groups, what's important is

Translation: Yes, you probably do know a bunch of stuff that I don't
know, but since I don't know it, it's not relevant.

---
Interesting that you find it necessary to try to put words in my
mouth. Sounds like you're so unsure of yourself that you have to
manufacture situations in which parts of imaginary conversations fill
in the empty spaces.
---

electronics and the ability to communicate. In seb, it's also

Have I not communicated well enough?

---
Obviously not well enough to put this matter to rest.
---

Modicum and acumen in the same sentence. No wonder it took you all
night to respond.

---
You were up all night just waiting for my response? How sweet!
---

OMG, I can't believe it. That must have been really hard.

---
For you, maybe, but not for me. Like I said before, if an apology is
warranted i'll offer it.
---

Maybe we can coexist then.

---
We'll see.
---

My comments in the original post were rhetorical, haven't you figured
that out yet?

---
Nope. Would you mind going back and dredging up those comments and
explaining what made them rhetorical?

OK, here we go:

First I said, "Maybe I could help make amends by belittling others,
nit-picking posts and posting a bunch
of OT crap?". Then I said, "Lets see if we can't get on to the road to
recovery now." That's all kinda the setup up indicating that sarcastic
and rhetorical remarks may follow. And then they did. I jibed Watson
since he tossed the first punch and you for what amounts to several
reasons (mainly your setup question when I've never slapped at you
before, I knew what you were trying to do and it torqued me off,
finally I've frankly found you to be a bit offensive lately and without
cause to other people namely Larry). So while it may not have been
entirely rhetorical, I really didn't expect this outcome.

---
None of it was rhetorical, in that 'rhetorical' is defined as language
used for mere style or effect or language marked by or tending to use
bombast.

What you were doing was using sarcasm and invective vituperatively in
order to retaliate for your feelings of having been belittled.
---

At any rate, you are the one setting the precident around here of
^^^^^^^^^
precedent

jumping down someones throat when you don't like the accuracy of
^^^^^^^^
someone's
their posts.

Why are spell checking my old posts now?

---
I'm not _just_ spell checking your posts, I'm correcting your improper
use of the language in order to allow you to communicate more
effectively.

And because I feel like it.
---

Actually I use the "F" word plenty well, I just tend to not spell it out
in usenet articles. Just trying to consider the children. ;-)

---
How sickeningly pompous. If you don't want to use 'fuck' when you
write, you don't have to blame it on the kids, just don't use it.
Besides, any "children" who hang out here have heard it all before
just in case you've been away from the planet for a while.
---

---
Certainly not, but it's not about a timeline, it's about changing
streams in mid-horse. What you said earlier, unconditionally, was that
you didn't feel it was necessary to make a scene, while what you're

At the time that is how I felt. And then you changed all that when you
tried to bust my chops on current vs. power or "current hogging" as you
like to call it. So, you prompted the horse change, not me.

---
SWYMMD? ROTFLMAO!!!
---

Not at all, just a substitution used to tighten up of the sloppy
construct, which included my substitution of 'power hogging' for your
"dissipate more power".

Yes, it's all about what serves your agenda best, isn't it?

---
Of course. I should subjugate mine and hitch my wagon to your star?
---

I merely asked a question designed to determine whether you did, in
fact, know the difference, but you took affrontery and refused to
answer it directly.

And I thought by saying "dissipate more power" that I made it perfectly
clear that I knew what you were hinting at. How direct does something
need to be before you can see it?

---
I'm not sure you remember, but I didn't comment on your answer until
you started with your diatribe after I had the _affrontery_ to hit you
with a "trick question" and Watson _dared_ to throw that little barb
at you, and you're _still_ not over it. For an 'old hand' on usenet
you sure have thin skin!
---

Nope, but then, you've got nothing to make bodacious claims about.

See, there you go making prejudicial statements again. You have no
idea.

---
Ok, then, let's hear about your bodacity.
---

Awww... baby demurs. And here I thought I was going to get to see
some good stuff.

OK, _I'll_ do it.

Here's the circuit:


E1
|
[R1]
|
+---->E2
|
[DS1]
|
+---->E3
|
[DS2]
|
GND

Unfortunately, the data sheet at the link you provided:

http://www.epitex.com/Catalog_PDF/08_Point_source_LED/L590CE-34F.PDF

doesn't show Vf min, and I couldn't find any Vf min for white LEDs so,
since you said that Vf can vary 2:1, looking at a Vf max of 4.0V for a
"typical" white LED at 20mA yields a Vf min of 2.0V. Also, 100mW
seems to be a pretty typical max dissipation, so if we redraw the
circuit with that in mind, and with LEDs with equal low Vf's we'll
get:


9.0V-+---->E1
|
[R1]
|
4.0V-+---->E2
|
[DS1]
|
2.0V-+---->E3
|
[DS2]
|
GND


The choice of 9V for E1 is based on the assumption that E1 will be
regulated and will give 1V of headroom if DS1 and DS2 are both at Vf
max.

Now, since the current in a series circuit is everywhere the same,
solving for R1 with 20mA of LED current yields:

(E1-E2) 5V
R1 = --------- = ------- = 250 ohms
It 0.02A


and the LEDs will each be dissipating:


P = IE = 0.02A * 2V = 0.04W


so everything will be fine.


Now, though, let's select a high Vf LED for DS1 and see what happens.


Here's the circuit now:

9.0V-+---->E1
|
[250]
|
6.0V-+---->E2
|
[DS1]
|
2.0V-+---->E3
|
[DS2]
|
GND


Since we now have a 3V drop across R1 the current will fall to:


E 3V
I = --- = ------ = 0.012A
R 250R


and the power being dissipated by DS1 will be:


P = 0.012A * 4V = 0.048W

So, if the LED is rated for 100mW max, it will be dissipating 48mW
and everything will still be fine, except the light output will
suffer.

If we have two Vf max LEDs in the circuit it'll look like this:


9.0V-+---->E1
|
[250]
|
8.0V-+---->E2
|
[DS1]
|
4.0V-+---->E3
|
[DS2]
|
GND


and the current in the circuit will fall to:

1V
I = ------ = 0.004A
250R

So, while everything will still be fine from a power dissipation
viewpoint, the light output from the LEDs will be greatly degraded.

Although it would be possible to fiddle with supply voltages and
series resistances in order to come up with a solution which would
allow a greater light output without overdriving the LEDs regardless
of the Vf spread, It would be more practical, IMO, to drive them with
a constant current.

So there we have it, the OP has been proven wrong. His LED's could not
have possibly failed.

---
But since there _was_ a failure, if LEDs with the range of Vf's you
said was possible were hooked up as shown and the supply voltage and
series resistance were as shown, it would have been impossible for an
overcurrent situation to cause one of the LEDs to fail, so _your_
analysis of the failure mode was in error!

In all fairness, though, I don't recall what the situation surrounding
the failure was or anything about the circuit other than that it was a
couple of LEDs hooked up in series with a current limiting resistor of
some kind and a power supply. If you can supply the details we can
get to the bottom of it.
---

We've already covered that.

Yes, I'd agree that we buried your civility a good while ago.

---
Not bad...

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Tom Del Rosso" <ng01@att.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:zpEbe.653617$w62.234009@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

"Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"" <NOSPAM@dslextreme.com
wrote
in message news:116seiqrq6pmr6a@corp.supernews.com...

My pet P.O. yesterday afternoon was when I was trying to format a
floppy
disk. I was logged on as administrator, and it told me "You do not
have
sufficient permissions to perform this operation." GRRRRRRRRRR!!!!
XP
must mean eXtra Pissed off!

How can that happen? Did you have explorer open with a view of the
floppy?

--

I dunno what you call explorer, but I may have had 'my computer' open.
I didn't think that was explorer. I had been doing some floppy disk
stuff with some weird software. Might've been the cause.

 

I Totally Agree that EWB, SUCKS.
It is about the most useless program I have ever bought and it cost me
almost $1000.00 for the Professional Version.


Rikard Bosnjakovic wrote:

Kevin Aylward wrote:

I am still staggered that anyone uses EWB. It is truly dreadful.

I use it for drawing my circuits and do basic testing. I don't find
it
that dreadful, but then I'm not an EE either so I can't say what's so
bad
about it.



--
Rikard Bosnjakovic http://bos.hack.org/cv/

Anyone sending unwanted advertising e-mail to my address will be
charged $250 for network traffic and computing time. By extracting
address from this message or its header, you agree to these terms.

 

[Kevin Aylward]

John Larkin wrote:

On 27 Apr 2005 06:48:22 -0700, chemelec@hotmail.com wrote:

I Totally Agree that EWB, SUCKS.
It is about the most useless program I have ever bought and it cost
me almost $1000.00 for the Professional Version.


They sent me a brochure trying to sell me their microwave version
because "Spice doesn't work above 100 MHz"

No, I'm not making this up!

Bloody amazing. I try and restrict my vacuous marketing claims to:

"The leading professional standard for ease of use and functionality in
affordable analogue and mixed-mode simulation software."

The reason being is, that I *personally* don't think any others are
"easy to use", so mine must be the leading one

Anything that is subjective is game for anyone to cliam!

Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

 

[Larry Oravetz]

Make sure the signal levels of all channels are the same level, the aurial
carriers are not too high , bandbass fitler the offending channel and then
make sure the cable "tilt" is nearly flat before amplifying any of them.
"UHFPD" <UHFPD@stardistramp.invalid> wrote in message
news:1gv7fxs.1cha6pf1g1imsvN%UHFPD@stardistramp.invalid...

Andrew Holme <andrew@nospam.com> wrote:


"The" RF cable - singular - i.e. is everything modulated onto one coax?
Just checking.

YES


Upon further investigation, even altering rf o/p channel does not
remove diagonal patterning from feed down UHF cable to downstairs.

This is really obvious when the cctv rf feed is fed downstairs, into
the aerial DA, without the aerial feed into the DA, seems to be
reduced somewhat by combining at the aerial DA i/p, with the UHF
normal earial

This paragraph is unclear. A diagram might help.


Both CCTV RF and Aerial connected gives less patterning than CCTV RF on
it's own




Is the DA meant to handle UHF modulator level signals? Does it have
multiple inputs? You're not using an aerial splitter / combiner into
its
antenna input are you?

Yes and yes


By "2 VHS in series" I take it you mean daisy-chained via UHF in/out.
So
you weren't using a DA then? Hmmm.... Can you post a link to spec /
info
on this DA.

Yes

What is the angle of the diagonal pattern? 45 degs

How many fringes do you get
across a TV line?

approx 30

What channels were the UHF modulators operating on at the
time? Does altering the UHF channels change the pattern?

No